Thames Cycle Path Closed

[Tom Crispin]

Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.

Perhaps keeping wooden ships in dry dock is not such a good idea.

 

[Phil Cook]

Tom Crispin wrote:

>Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
>Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.

The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
belief there were gas cylinders involved.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm

"Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
and the Docklands Light Railway shut.

The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
visitors.

Eight fire engines were sent to tackle the fire which started shortly
before 0500 BST.

Speaking to BBC News the Chief Executive of the Cutty Sark Trust,
Richard Doughty, said the fire brigade told him they were treating the
fire as suspicious. "

>Perhaps keeping wooden ships in dry dock is not such a good idea.

Being made of wood has nothing to do with it, do you remeber the Queen
Elizabeth or the Normadie? Both steel ships that sank in flames whilst
being refurbished afloat.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

 

[Tony Raven]

Tom Crispin wrote on 21/05/2007 07:09 +0100:
> Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
> Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>
> Perhaps keeping wooden ships in dry dock is not such a good idea.

Keeping them in dry dock is fine but as usual, letting workmen on them
to restore them is a very bad idea. Cue footage of Windsor Castle and
numerous other heritage workemen fires (although this may have been
external and deliberate listening to the TV news)

By the way does anyone find it odd that the BBC with their 5-25kW RF
transmitters should be having a go at 100mW WiFi transmitters? Grass
Houses and Thrones?

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Phil Cook
[email protected] says...
> Tom Crispin wrote:
>
> >Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
> >Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>
> The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
> belief there were gas cylinders involved.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm
>
> "Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
> and the Docklands Light Railway shut.
>
> The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
> visitors.
>
It's going to need more than that now - souvenir ashes, anyone?

 

[Phil Cook]

Rob Morley wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Phil Cook
>[email protected] says...
>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>>
>> >Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
>> >Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>>
>> The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
>> belief there were gas cylinders involved.
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm
>>
>> "Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
>> and the Docklands Light Railway shut.
>>
>> The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
>> visitors.
>>
>It's going to need more than that now - souvenir ashes, anyone?

Fortunately Cutty Sark was composite iron-wood construction and the
masts and spars were elsewhere at the time as was 50 percent of the
planking. It's still going to be a Big Job though :-(
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

 

[David Martin]

On May 21, 9:53 am, Phil Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> Rob Morley wrote:
> >In article <[email protected]>, Phil Cook
> >[email protected] says...
> >> Tom Crispin wrote:
>
> >> >Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
> >> >Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>
> >> The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
> >> belief there were gas cylinders involved.
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm
>
> >> "Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
> >> and the Docklands Light Railway shut.
>
> >> The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
> >> visitors.
>
> >It's going to need more than that now - souvenir ashes, anyone?
>
> Fortunately Cutty Sark was composite iron-wood construction and the
> masts and spars were elsewhere at the time as was 50 percent of the
> planking. It's still going to be a Big Job though :-(

At least they don't need to kill off the rot with environmentally
unfriendly chemicals now it has been heat- sterilised.
Every cloud has a silver lining ;-)

...d

 

[TheMgt]

Phil Cook wrote:
> Rob Morley wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>, Phil Cook
>> [email protected] says...
>>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
>>>> Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>>> The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
>>> belief there were gas cylinders involved.
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm
>>>
>>> "Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
>>> and the Docklands Light Railway shut.
>>>
>>> The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
>>> visitors.
>>>
>> It's going to need more than that now - souvenir ashes, anyone?
>
> Fortunately Cutty Sark was composite iron-wood construction and the
> masts and spars were elsewhere at the time as was 50 percent of the
> planking. It's still going to be a Big Job though :-(

They should probably just build a complete new hull. The wood that's
left will be the stuff thats's too damp and rotten to burn and the iron
parts were already dissolving into rusty sludge. It'd be far more
interesting as a sailable ship than than as a mouldering relic anyway.

 

[TerryJ]

> > Rob Morley wrote:
> > >> >Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
> > >> >Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.

What awful hypocrisy to close the cycle path.

Surely with a little ingenuity and bike carrying, possibly some
climbing, it would be '' possible '' to get across or through the
debris.It might be very dangerous, but any cyclist in the habit of
using such facilities is not the type to be so easily put off.

And now the poor motorists may find their roads used by less important
people.
Should we use the pavement instead?

TerryJ

 

[[email protected]]

On May 21, 11:04 am, TerryJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Rob Morley wrote:
> > > >> >Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
> > > >> >Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>
> What awful hypocrisy to close the cycle path.
>
> Surely with a little ingenuity and bike carrying, possibly some
> climbing, it would be '' possible '' to get across or through the
> debris.It might be very dangerous, but any cyclist in the habit of
> using such facilities is not the type to be so easily put off.
>
> And now the poor motorists may find their roads used by less important
> people.
> Should we use the pavement instead?

I asked a nice copper if he minded me returning the wrong way along a
short section of the gyratory. He said "just keep to the left". The
ride down to the woolwich ferry was lovely with no traffic on the main
rode (even managed to catch a fire engine draft for some of the way).
I bumped into a colleague and we had a pleasant pootle through some of
the remaining post inductrial wasteland of north woolwich that I
fondly recall from childhood.

best wishes
james

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

On May 21, 8:34 am, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> By the way does anyone find it odd that the BBC with their 5-25kW RF
> transmitters should be having a go at 100mW WiFi transmitters? Grass
> Houses and Thrones?
>
Not at all *odd*. Hypocritical, yes.

If I had an hour to spare, I'd be interested to see if the inverse
square law is mentioned. I noticed they were comparing terminals to
base stations on the extended trailer on the Jeremy Vine show on the
radio just now.
--
A

 

[Trevor A Panther]

"TheMgt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> Rob Morley wrote:
>>
>>> In article <[email protected]>, Phil Cook
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Due to a fire on the Cutty Sark, the Thames Cycle Path through
>>>>> Greenwich, and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, have been closed.
>>>> The whole of Greenwich was closed, roads and all. Mainly due to the
>>>> belief there were gas cylinders involved.
>>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6675381.stm
>>>>
>>>> "Greenwich town centre in south-east London has been closed to traffic
>>>> and the Docklands Light Railway shut.
>>>>
>>>> The ship was currently undergoing a £25m renovation and was closed to
>>>> visitors.
>>>>
>>> It's going to need more than that now - souvenir ashes, anyone?
>>
>> Fortunately Cutty Sark was composite iron-wood construction and the
>> masts and spars were elsewhere at the time as was 50 percent of the
>> planking. It's still going to be a Big Job though :-(
>
> They should probably just build a complete new hull. The wood that's
> left will be the stuff thats's too damp and rotten to burn and the iron
> parts were already dissolving into rusty sludge. It'd be far more
> interesting as a sailable ship than than as a mouldering relic anyway.

Stretching a bit furhter OT

That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
Britain in to a replica!

I went to see the SS Great Britain in about 1978-80 ish ( not later) and it
was only just open to the public and was basically an empty shell below decks.
And at that it seemed to be mainly holes held together but bits of iron Well
I am exagerating more than a tad -- but you know what I mean. It was berthed
in the dry dock in which it was built.

I actually thought that at that time it was a superb piece of original ancient
ship with minimal "add ons" to make it safe for the visiting public.

I suspect that in the present day litigiously oriented society the pblic
wouldn't have been let anywhere near it!

So on looking at the SS GB website I can see that it has been restored
(rebuilt!) out of all recognition -- to much of "it's original design"!. I,
in fact, wonder what percentage of the tourist event is still the orginal! It
is like going to Stonehenge and finding it rebuilt the to original designers
specifications ( I am sure the Ministry of Public buildings and Works ( MPBW
or what ever to modern equivalent is, has the original plans).

I live in the village of Conisbrough where a very fine Castle Keep has. after
some700 years, been reroofed -- I was so pleased the the fabric which had been
opened to the elements for hundreds of years was being protected. I was also
please the the log missing 2 floors of the keep were replaced to all visitir
acces to the internal surrounds. But hen they filled it wit paraphinalia and
put in a prerecorded "show" The central cellar like store became a dungeon and
hollow, recorded, ghost voices now eminate from the depths.

It has ceased to be an historic building and is now a play house which spouts
out a false story to titilate the few vivitors that arrive.

it is why the "living and lived in" monuments like Chatsworth, HMS Victory
are so much more real! As a Pongo I say thank god for Nelson and subsequently
the RN.

So I am nearly finished with my rant! ( yes I know I do it now and then and
now and now and then!)

I am sure that the remnants of the Cutty Sark ( and as a boy I sailed in
er - oh yes I did -- endlessly --- many nights as I snuggled down to
sleep) will be rebuilt --- but it wil not be the Cutty Sark" -- perhaps it
would be better to redesign the holds to be able to let visitors have an
eveing "sailors meal! -- complete with swaying decks and creaking timbers --
and specially bred weevils to add flavour to the event.

Right!

I have stopped -- my high horse has finally gone into the next field

Sorry about that but occassinalOT rants are good for your souls!

Just done a spell check -- it gave me the all clear -- I don't believe it!


Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.ukvstors t

 

[Clive George]

"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> held together but bits of iron
^^^
> I am exagerating
^^^^^^^^^^^
> the pblic wouldn't have been let anywhere near it!
^^^^^
> much of "it's original design"!
^^^
(though that may not be your doing)

> going to Stonehenge and finding it rebuilt the to original designers
^^^^^^
> I was also please the the log missing 2 floors of the keep
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> were replaced to all visitir
^^^^^^^
> acces to the internal surrounds.
^^^^^
> But hen they filled it wit paraphinalia and
^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> now eminate from the depths.
^^^^^^^
> titilate the few vivitors that arrive.
^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^

> Just done a spell check -- it gave me the all clear -- I don't believe it!

I wouldn't

cheers,
clive

 

[Trevor A Panther]

"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>

>
> Right!
>
> I have stopped -- my high horse has finally gone into the next field
>
> Sorry about that but occassinalOT rants are good for your souls!
>
> Just done a spell check -- it gave me the all clear -- I don't believe it!
>
>
> Trevor A Panther
> In South Yorkshire,
> England, United Kingdom.
> www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.ukvstors t
>
>
Sorry about a lot of typos. Quite dreadful!

Trevor

 

[Tom Orr]

"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
<snipped>
> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
> Britain in to a replica!

I remember my father turning down our suggestion of a visit to the Wallace
Monument in Stirling to see Wallace's sword: "five new blades and three new
handles" was his explanation.

Tom.

 

[Clive George]

"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
> Britain in to a replica!

Oh - forgot to mention, have you seen the Viking ships in Oslo? Dug out of
the ground in late victorian times or so. Back then they knew they were at
the peak of human knowledge, so knew best - so "restored" the boats to an
extent. Fortunately not too badly, and it does provide a better idea of what
the boats were like than looking at a few mouldy timbers, but it is a bit
obvious where the new wood is sometimes.

cheers,
clive

 

[Don Whybrow]

Clive George wrote:
> "Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
>> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS
>> Great Britain in to a replica!
>
> Oh - forgot to mention, have you seen the Viking ships in Oslo? Dug out
> of the ground in late victorian times or so. Back then they knew they
> were at the peak of human knowledge, so knew best - so "restored" the
> boats to an extent. Fortunately not too badly, and it does provide a
> better idea of what the boats were like than looking at a few mouldy
> timbers, but it is a bit obvious where the new wood is sometimes.

I think that if one is making a restoration it should be made blatantly
clear which parts are original and which parts have been added as part
of the restoration. By all means add bits of wood & metal, but
paint/treat them so that they are obvious.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"To communicate with Mars, converse with spirits, To report the
behaviour of the sea monster, Describe the horoscope,
haruspicate or scry, Observe disease in signatures." (T.S.Eliot)

 

[Nick Austin]

On Mon, 21 May 2007 14:51:07 GMT, "Trevor A Panther"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
>restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
>Britain in to a replica!

Restoration means replacing missing, old and worn out bits with brand
new parts. The idea is to produce something that looks and functions
the same as it would have done originally.

Conservation means retaining and preserving as much of the original
as is possible. The end result doesn't necessarily have to be
something that works.

A replica just looks like the original. It doesn't need to work.

Additionally some people apply a "50% rule", which means that at
no point in its life have more than half of the parts needed to
be replaced to restore function.

These terms are frequently abused, as in a "Conservation Area" is
where building and gardens need to be maintained to give a certain
look but no one really cares how that look is achieved.

Nick.

 

[Niall Wallace]

"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
> Britain in to a replica!
>

In the case of a vehicle which has been used chances are there were many
parts of the vehicle that were not the same as when it was built.

In the case of a bicycle its relativley simple to me, the frame is what
matters.
(Are there differing views on this, the frame is the only part of a bike
that i don't see as being a consumable )

In the case of a car it is probably the chassis (DVLA seem to agree by
giving the chassis the highest points score for deciding what registration
mark a rebuild will get (score over 7 and it gets a Q plate))
(In Historic sport there is differing views on modifications and the current
rules are such that cars which raced in the approriate period in their
present condition are banned because they aren't in the origianl condition
associated with the chassis)

In the case of a boat I don't know! The decking has probably been replaced
in many parts during its years of use, but the hull plankings?

The reports say that the sark has/had a cast iron frame, if this is reusable
then i would say that any other part could have been replaced while the
thing was in use without it becoming an entirley different boat.

Niall

 

[Tony Raven]

Clive George wrote on 21/05/2007 16:15 +0100:
> "Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
>> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS
>> Great Britain in to a replica!
>
> Oh - forgot to mention, have you seen the Viking ships in Oslo? Dug out
> of the ground in late victorian times or so. Back then they knew they
> were at the peak of human knowledge, so knew best - so "restored" the
> boats to an extent. Fortunately not too badly, and it does provide a
> better idea of what the boats were like than looking at a few mouldy
> timbers, but it is a bit obvious where the new wood is sometimes.
>

The aim of modern conservation and restoration is to leave the original
as untouched as possible and make sure that it is clear what has been
added as new. Personally I think it helps understand it better than
just leaving the original bits as is and if done properly the new bits
can be removed leaving the original as it was.


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Niall Wallace wrote:
>"Trevor A Panther" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> That's an intersting aside -- really. At what point does "continual
>> restoration" change an original artifact like the Cutty Sark or SS Great
>> Britain in to a replica!
>
>In the case of a vehicle which has been used chances are there were many
>parts of the vehicle that were not the same as when it was built.
>
>In the case of a bicycle its relativley simple to me, the frame is what
>matters.
>(Are there differing views on this, the frame is the only part of a bike
>that i don't see as being a consumable )

But a brazed steel frame can be dismantled and reassembled. If one
seat stay is damaged in a crash and replaced, is that a new bike?